> I should check: 70% performance is better or worse than the baseline? :)
Worse than pure Ur/Web.
> Again, I'd be very interested in any help anyone is willing to offer on
> comparing the execution of the latest Ur/Web benchmark against one of
> the current winners for the 'plaintext' benchmark.
A sketch of that based on limited testing:
Vert.x is the current 'plaintext' winner and 3rd for 'json'. When I ran it
against Ur/Web I noticed some extraneous headers in Ur/Web's responses.
There was a duplicate 'Content-length' header (there was already a
'Content-Length' header) and a 'Content-script-type' header that was doing
nothing in that context.
Removing these bumped 'json' performance from
`621613 requests in 10.00s, 123.90MB read`
to
`651695 requests in 10.00s, 93.85MB read`
. This puts Ur/Web quite close to JITted Vert.x at
`672104 requests in 10.00s, 97.43MB read`
.
On plaintext, I got Ur/Web at
`679445 requests in 10.00s, 84.88MB read`
and warmed-up Vert.x at
`715567 requests in 10.00s, 90.08MB read`
.
I've attached a patch removing the duplicate 'Content-length'.
# HG changeset patch
# User <[email protected]>
# Date 1386829896 18000
# Thu Dec 12 01:31:36 2013 -0500
# Node ID 629d228612f360c01fd43d9e0cef039f1b528236
# Parent 8e6e3d9cea228dd30315bee5338b7b23fdac6c64
Removed duplicate "Content-length" header
diff -r 8e6e3d9cea22 -r 629d228612f3 src/c/http.c
--- a/src/c/http.c Wed Dec 11 18:54:42 2013 -0500
+++ b/src/c/http.c Thu Dec 12 01:31:36 2013 -0500
@@ -233,7 +233,6 @@
sock, uw_really_send, close);
if (rr != KEEP_OPEN) {
- char clen[100];
if (keepalive) {
char *connection = uw_Basis_requestHeader(ctx, "Connection");
@@ -244,8 +243,6 @@
if (!should_keepalive)
uw_write_header(ctx, "Connection: close\r\n");
- sprintf(clen, "Content-length: %d\r\n", uw_pagelen(ctx));
- uw_write_header(ctx, clen);
uw_send(ctx, sock);
}_______________________________________________
Ur mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur
